About this Show

[untitled]

NETWORK

DURATION
00:30:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 89 (615 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
528

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

Rosemary Boske 3, Us 2, Nick 2, Mccarthy 2, California Civil 1, Pml 1, The City 1, Us Do 1, Bathrooms 1, San Franciscoans 1, San Francisco 1, California 1, Mar 1, Sro Families United 1, Lawrence 1, Micah 1, Carla 1, Walker 1, Lawrence Cornfield 1, Carla Johnson 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV    [untitled]  

    December 22, 2012
    7:00 - 7:30pm PST  

7:00pm
the desk and gathers dust. with the support of the building inspection commission i'm happy to address any concerns you feel we may not be meeting or not addressing and have that conversation any time. >> commissioner lee. >> thank you. i want to express my appreciation that you are doing the outreach and talking to the schools and getting them to understand that they may have to have a retrofit project in the future, because i can understand that some of these projects would end up costing a lot of money and there would be a lot of planning before the school actually starts construction to retrofit. but my question was actually along with commissioner melgar and commissioner walker were talking about. i was wondering about the cost of displacing tenants and businesses. you mentioned loans available to property owners. could the loans take into account the
7:01pm
cost of displacing 10 -- tenants and businesses. >> that's a very good question. we haven't brought that up to the lenders, a lot of these are going to be equity-based loans but i think it's an important option because for landlords that can be a tremendous expense. >> first of all my comments, we're extremely lucky that you took this job because it's going to be -- and you're young enough to stay at it and we've met a couple times on the issue and you have kind of brought me up to speed and i think you are the right guy for the right job at the right time and we're lucky to have you and also kind of a shout out to lawrence for his work over the years and putting this together. he's kind of handing it off to you now and i know he's in the background watching, still involved, so he's been a tremendous, a lot of us have a lot of respect for him for all
7:02pm
the work he's done to bring it to this point to hand it off to you so you can hand it off to the next level. obviously in january we'll know more. most of the people that i talked to that own properties, get it. i think it's just an educational thing. once they understand they will understand going forward it really works. it's pay it now or pay later, we got to deal with it. it's the price we pay for living in such a wonderful part of the world. good luck with everything and micah, is he here, too? is he working with you? these two can be found at any time downstairs in the chambers, the dungeon offices of city hall. so please i encourage anybody to drop in, i'm sorry, commissioner walker has more questions. >> i just have one question. one of the things we found works also, especially maybe looking at some of the other -- beyond soft story is
7:03pm
disclosures, which help. it's something that if people know what's going on with the building generally it encourages the owner to fix it up a little bit more. is that something you have talked about? >> it's incorporated in the 30 year work plan. the problem is right now the real estate community doesn't really have a tangible disclosure that explains structural deficiencies. you hear about pml's and things like that where people buy these properties. the soft story condition doesn't really appear. there's a few dogs in the race as far as developing a rating system that actually works and we're meeting with those players that are developing it and really seeing it's a difficult thing to develop something that can be used universally, but it is a task on our program and that's something i'm excited to see not only on larger commercial buildings but also small one and two family dwellings. right now it's not in our purview to mandate anything for
7:04pm
one of these buildings but to develop something so a person buying a property really understands what's going on, that was a big part of capss to develop something so seismic fitness is valued. also to touch on a big thing you to lawrence cornfield. i appreciate you bringing that up, president mccarthy. lawrence, all of you know him, was really a champion of the capss project, even when capss didn't have funding, i'm thoroughly convinced he funded it out of pocket for a few years. there's so many people involved in that process we could thank i could stay up here for 20 minutes .d but if we didn't have the 10-plus years of hard work of people trying to develop this plan, i
7:05pm
wouldn't be sitting here today. it's really those people that have done all the heavy lifting and now it's my turn to step in, but they are still around and they are still continuing to help because everyone is very passionate about this. as much as we joke about this being an apolitical situation, i really believe it is. this is something for all san franciscoans. >> the tracking system, you make sure you are plugged into that. >> i'm a frequent user of it, i will definitely be paying attention to that. >> thank you for your presentation here today. >> i'll leave these up here. >> i've got one copy. madam secretary. >> is there any public comment on item 4? seeing none, item no. 5, discussion and possible action regarding a proposed revised
7:06pm
ordinance, file no. 121018, amending the san francisco housing code by amending section 206 to add section 1002 to the list of retroactive provisions; no. 2, amending section 505 to require grab bars in total common use water closets and bathing facilities; 3, amending section 1002 to include as a substandard housing condition the failure to provide a usable telephone jack and telephone wiring as required by the california civil code and, 4, making environmental findings, legislative findings and findings pursuant to california health and safety code section 17958.5. >> good morning, commissioners, good to see you all, nick pagalato on behalf of
7:07pm
commissioner mar. >> in 2001 commissioner mar called for a hearing on issues affecting our most vulnerable residents. because this sector of our community is growing not just city-wide but specifically in residential hotels we thought it was timely to try to address some of the challenges that these residents face. we have been working very closely with a group of stake holders, particularly sro activists, the mission sro collaborative, the city sro collaborative, sro families united and the senior action network. they came together and produced a report in 2011 that outlined many of the issues that both seniors and people with disabilities are facing in residential hotels. it was presented to us in this
7:08pm
hearing and along with a report, they produced a set of concrete recommendations for mitigating problems that this community faces. supervisor mar, along with co-sponsor to this legislation, committed to help implement these recommendations and this legislation is the first step in making sure that that promise is kept. this legislation is co-sponsored by supervisor olague and board president khu. it's being brought frd to your approval after several rounds in some of the bic subcommittees we've been working through some of the technical challenges that have come out after its introduction. first of all i'd like to thank a couple people, first of all rosemary boske who has been tremendously helpful and a tremendous leader, as she always is, when dealing with tenant issues in our xhuept.
7:09pm
she has helped us overcome some of the technical problems we faced. also carla johnson in the mayor's office of disability has been very general yus with her time and has been very helpful in helping us focus this legislation and not only make it helpful to sro tenants but also implementable and cost effective for owners. really it's a very straightforward proposition that we're presenting to you. it's two recommendations, one that there be working phone jacks in sro tenants' rooms. the necessity for that is very clear. we need to be able to have communication with the outside world, any of us do, but in particular people who have mobility issues, seniors who rely on care givers who may have emergencies that come up on a more regular basis than other residents need to be able to communicate with the outside world. it's absolutely critical that all of these rooms have working phone jacks.
7:10pm
the second issue is to put grab bars in common bathrooms. again, a very commonsense idea. there are countless accidents that happen in sro's as a result of people slipping and falling in bathtubs. for the most part these could be prevented with the use of grab bars. this legislation is presenting that idea in a way that is very straightforward, that's implementable and also importantly that's going to be cost effective for sro operators. what we are presenting to you right now is still a work in progress. as i have said, we are working through some of the technical issues around the installation of the grab bars in particular. we have miss johnson here and rosemary boske who are going to be able to talk through some of the technical issues that we hope we've been able to come up with answers for and we are going to take this legislation, once it's in its most advanced
7:11pm
stage, out to the owner community to make sure we have buy-in. one important facet that we're going to be baking into this legislation which will become effective 30 days after its passage is that notices of violation won't be issued for the first 6 months because we want to be sure operators have the time not just to become aware of the installation and install the bars but to do it in the right way. we're going to be creating a technical assistance manual with the help of the mayor's office on disability that will be distributed to building operators to help them do the job in the right way. so thank you for this opportunity, we think it's a very straightforward and commonsense piece of legislation and we hope to get your support. thank you very much. i will now turn it over to rosemary boske >> thank you, nick. >> thank you, nick. members of the commission, one of the things i want you to be aware of as far as the history of this is that one of the
7:12pm
things that came out in the reports from the sro collaborative, which is funded by the department of building inspection, is that the city itself takes recently homeless individuals, individuals who are barely ambulatory, and sends them to sro's. we have individuals in these buildings that are aging in place and becoming seniors. i will tell you that the first and most primary xlaipblt that the department of building inspection gets regarding a residential hotel has to do with the bathrooms, the common bathrooms. they are highly problematic as far as the maintenance of them and to make sure that they are available for the residents. typically the code in chapter 5 indicates you have to have a minimum of two of these common bathrooms
7:13pm
per floor, given the range of guest rooms. the ordinance proposes retroactively that 6 months after the date of adoption the ordinance will go into effect, that will give us time to do the outreach we plan to do to the property owners in addition to talking to them in the sro task force, of which i am a chair, but we envision doing a direct mailing to all the property owners that would have a copy of the ordinance, a technical manual that would give them advice on how to install the grab bars in the most efficient and soft-saving manner. that's something the mayor's office and carla will talk about a little bit more. she has great expertise in this area considering she's been addressing some of these same issues in the nonprofit residential hotels seeing the types of framing available to
7:14pm
permanently attach these grab bars so they can take 250 pounds of force. so that's the grab bar issue. with respect to the phone jack issue, he essentially the legislation before you is codifying the legislation. the cheapest cell phone for them to be would be 30 to 50 dollars a month, and that is not affordable for most people who call a physician, et cetera. if they get the life line situation and they go through that process with a land line it's anywhere between maybe 10 to 15 dollars a month and i'm sure josh and others when they get up here, they'll be able to talk about that. that's why
7:15pm
the phone jack legislation is in the ordinance codifying state law. how do we implement that? the way that will be implemented, because the phone jack could be there, we don't know if it's live until the occupant of that unit has gotten a contract with a vendor for service. in that case if they call dbi and say i don't have a working phone jack, we're going to come out and look at it and if it's not working or not there, we will issue a notice of violation. with respect to the bathrooms, 6 months after the adoption -- and this will be the same thing for the phone jack -- if the grab bars are not there and they're not put in with permits and they are not properly secured, then we will write a notice of violation. the package that will go out 6 months before right after the adoption of this, if it gets adopted, will have all the information for those property owners so they will know how to install it, what information to
7:16pm
attach to the building permit. in discussions with director hue, he has indicated plans will not be necessary but using this technical manual and sending this out from a technical standpoint will help owners select the installation most appropriate for their particular building. this has gone twice to the accessibility subcommittee, we believe the language is workable, it defines where the criteria is going to come from as far as the height, the length, the gripable surface, the strength of the grab bars but it also cites chapters 11a and 11b in the building code but it also has language in there to allow for a case by case review given the configurations of the existing
7:17pm
toilet rooms or the bathrooms. we're dealing with buildings that are very old in nature and you're going to have all different types of configure races. we believe the packages we will send out will allow them to be installed efficiently in a cost way that will not be prohibitive to the property owner and, as i said, we will be doing a large amount of outreach along with our sro collaborative partners and other partners to get this information out before we entertain any code enforcement. so, with that, i would like to introduce carla, see if she has anything she would like to go into. there was a lot of discussion about the application of this. she's been absolutely critical in this process. >> good morning, president mccarthy and commissioners, it's a pleasure to have the
7:18pm
opportunity to speak to you today. i really want to strongly lend my support for your consideration of this legislation. i think that the senior and disability action and the sro collaborative group have done a really fine job of documenting the reason why this is so necessary, why it's so necessary from a safety perspective to allow people to live and to age gracefully in their housing. our office has a lot of experience with these types of hotels. because we are the city's overall ada coordinator, we actually do the plan check and the field inspection for the renovations of the publicly funded sro units and we have the opportunity to make those units adaptable and accessible for people with disabilities. but the privately sro units are a big gap in our housing for having access and resource for the people who live there.
7:19pm
we have offered to provide our technical assistance to this effort in order to make the implementation as simple and cost effective and effective as possible. through the development of a technical assistance manual that will include not only photographs but also diagrams that really accurately match the conditions that we see out in these sro's where the bathrooms are much smaller than what we would build today under a fully accessible unit, and the rooms are already finished. they have the tile on the walls, they have the plaster and the sheetrock and such, and that means that as an existing construction we don't necessarily have the option to open up the walls the way that we would if we were doing a full renovation. so we have some simple solutions as to how you can make these grab bars structurally sound by putting applications on top of the surfaces, whether that is putting a piece of 1 by lumber
7:20pm
that spans the stud framing and is securely attached that the grab bars can be attached to, or when you get into the wet areas like the shower and the tub, putting stainless steel plates across the wall surface so the grab bars can be securely attached. so the technical assistance manual would not only lay out all of the code compliant requirements for diameter, spacing on the wall, length, strength and height and those details but even also provide very specific solutions for those smaller bathrooms to recommend that maybe a vertical grab bar is the right solution for a very, very small water closet instead of trying to install a 3-foot horizontal grab bar. so by developing a technical assistance manual, the permit applicant, the hotel owner,
7:21pm
will be able to select the installation based upon the different options that we provide and that should make the permitting a little more simple for the building department because then the plan checker can just say, oh, you are going to use option 2b and everyone will be able to reference what 2b means. so we remain committed to supporting the building department should you choose to implement this legislation and we sincerely hope that you take that recommendation to heart. thank you. i am available to answer any questions. i know we have a lot of technical people on the commission and we can talk through the details. >> commissioner mar. >> first of all i think this legislation is long overdue and i think it's fairly straightforward. i do have more of a concern about the shower grab bar situation. i was wondering, is part of the process that's not finished in
7:22pm
terms of the technical expertise also working with our building inspection site? because i feel like having been in some of the sro's, there are problems with the shower stalls and some of them probably, you know, are going to have a difficult time anchoring to something real. and that's my main concern, that if they put in grab bars it's not cosmetic. if somebody grabs them they are not going to have a bunch of tile or the wall fall on them, which would even be worse. i want to be sure that the building inspection side is also involved. so the case by case thing, whenever i see that, it's a little worrysome in some ways unless the specifications are very clear from a mechanical point of view, that these are real grab bars. they are going to be anchored and again it's case by case, but i
7:23pm
feel that even if our inspectors go in and they see a shower stall that needs, needs to have some work done on the walls, that should be done. that's how i feel. i feel that that should be done so when those bars are put in that it is really a safety . the safety bar should be done. i want to be sure the showers themselves are safe. >> commissioner walker. >> thank you for coming and thank you community outreach folks for this long -- i know i've sat in a couple of the meetings to help prioritize some of the issues. this is a great first step. i think that to the point commissioner mar made, i have also been, seen some of the bathrooms and quite
7:24pm
frankly this is probably the least of the issues as far as maintenance and i think it might actually be a good opportunity to improve conditions more broadly, to actually have this as a first step to go in and if there is not a place to anchor it, then that's a problem that needs to be fixed. i think this is a wonderful first step. i know there's a lot of other issues that cape up out of the meetings and trying to increase habitability
7:25pm
of residential hotels. does that mean that some showers or bathing areas might not have to put them in? does it mean there will be x amount per floor that have to have it and maybe some of them don't? i mean, did you guys good into more details about that? >> we did. i just want to say, that, that i also share your concern about a safe installation. we wouldn't want to give any false assurances to somebody that they are holding something that could come off the wall. during the inspection process i have pulled grab bars off the wall because part of my test is really a load test. i apply quite a bit of force. i will work with the inspectors how to inspect those. going back to the original
7:26pm
statement, if we were to describe a code-complying grab bar installation, what you would have to have is a water closet or a toilet facility that has an adjacent wall that extends at least two feet beyond the leading edge of the water closet fixture so that you could install a 42-inch bar on the side and then the room itself would need to be at least 3 feet wide so you could put a 36-inch bar at the back. and it is our experience that many of these rooms are quite smaller than that and what we wanted to do was leave the flexibility to install the most crab bar they could fit given the constraints of the existing space. and when we talk about the shower installation, in showers there are, again, a very prescribetive outline of like an l-shaped bar in order to be
7:27pm
code compliant. but we know whether it's for waterproofing reasons or even just space limitations, sometimes a vertical grab bar is the best solution to give somebody to hold on to and still be able to fit the grab bar in. that's why the flexibility is there. each floor plan has to be analyzed independently but we'll see repeating floor plans based on how these units are designed. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. i appreciate this, particularly around the grab bars with the aging nature of our populations. is there any sense of the range of costs for the sro owners and providers? in the previous presentation there was some means for assistance if that became expensive. are you working on that? >> it's a very good question. i am a former general building
7:28pm
contractor but my prices are way out of date and i would probably recommend that we talk to he people doing the installations. the unit itself, the grab bar, runs between $25 and $50 apiece. if you add on to that some heavy gauge sheetmetal as one of the methods for mounting, that's another $30 to $60, depending on the length. so you are looking at 30 plus 30, maybe a range of $60 to $120 for the materials for each grab bar, then the installation goes on top of that. installation, you know, times can vary. there can be a very simple installation when you have a wood frame building where you can locate the studs,
7:29pm
or it might take a little more time if what you have is a concrete infill type building where you need to drill with masonry bits. there is a range, i think, of installation time. >> since we're talking about costs, the cost of installation doesn't seem to be too great. do we have an idea of what the permit cost may be? >> what the permit cost would be? i would have to kick that ball. >> i'm asking because these costs are not that great. i don't want to see the permitting cost to be --. >> maybe if we could discuss --. >> physical construction. >> when these come to me regarding the bar, initially they asking no permit but i